Do You Want Alternative Energy Related Articles?

October 14th, 2007

UPDATE: OKOKOK. I got it. It’s running about 15 yes to 1 no. Fascinating. I don’t know why so many of you YES voters would stay quiet in comments, but anyway, it’s overwhelming.

— End Update —

“Fifteen years ago I thought solar power was impractical because I thought nuclear power was the answer. But I spent some time on an advisory committee on waste disposal to the Atomic Energy Commission. After that, I began to be very, very skeptical because of the hazards. That’s when I began to study solar power. I’m convinced we have the technology to handle it right now. We could make the transition in a matter of decades if we begin now.”

—M. King Hubbert, Leading Edge Magazine, February 1983

A few people have submitted the Windbelt story. Obviously, I’m aware of this, and most other developments along these lines, as I follow energy issues daily. You may have noticed, however, that I’ve stopped covering alternative energy news on Cryptogon. There are two reasons for this:

1) Energy scarcity has nothing to do with technological barriers (I’ve written about this so many times that the subject is almost nauseating to me now);

and

2) Idiotic comments on the issue by full time shills and people who don’t understand the politics wastes everyones’ time.

But, if you want to see alternative energy stories, or not, let me know. It doesn’t take much effort for me to post interesting developments, since I’m doing the reading anyway.

To vote for more alternative energy stories, make the email subject: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY STORIES: YES

To vote for less alternative energy stories, make the email subject: ALTERNATIVE ENERGY STORIES: NO

Before you vote YES, know that comments will be turned off.

I don’t know of any topic that generates more useless comments than altervative energy technologies and I don’t have the time to set the ignorance and lies (by omission and derailment) straight over and over again on these issues. I’ve been content to just leave it. But readers are submitting the stories anyway…

For every clean energy invention, there are lots of people who want to leave comments in blogs (not just on Cryptogon) about why it’s no good for anything and how peak oil will kill us all off, etc. Even mentioning alternatives represents thought crimes for these people. There are lots of ways to lie about energy scarcity. When religious peaknics are pressed into a corner on the absurdity of energy scarcity (Hubbert himself, the god of peak oilers, said solar was the way in 1983, never mind the untapped gigawatts of kinetic energy that are unleashed by the oceans of the world each day), they change the subject to top soil depletion, economic collapse, climate change, etc.—all of which I acknowledge as very real and far more difficult to mitigate than energy scarcity. This is lying by derailing the conversation; changing the subject. The expense of clean energy is the next nonsense argument, with never a breath on what the U.S. spends on military operations around the world per hour, per minute, per second vs. the incredible advancements that resulted from minuscule grants into clean energy research. This is lying by omission. Additionally, the Steorn debacle now comes up in discussions of clean energy inventions. (See here and here.) This is called poisoning the well.

The barriers to clean energy are political in nature, not scientific or technological. And to the people who endlessly mention Hubbert’s Peak, and never mention the man’s ideas for the solution…

How many peak oil sites are there? Hundreds? Thousands? How many of them mention Hubbert’s words above about solar power… Look into it. [just don’t rely on Google] The answer is that NONE of the big peak oil sites mention that passage from M King Hubbert [as of October 14, 2007].

That’s one of the most fascinating aspects of peak oil that I’ve encountered so far.

CORRECTION: Google set me up the bomb somewhat on that one above. Never say never when the statement is based on a belief that Google’s index is accurate. I should know better. It doesn’t index Cryptogon properly anymore. Tim has warned about this as well. I use the built in search function in WordPress to find things on my own site now because Google is disappearing things. But that’s the beauty of the Intertubes; when a correction is necessary, it doesn’t take long for me to hear about it.

Gav wrote in and found these references to Hubbert’s statements on the viability of solar power:

http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/2006/05/atomic-wedgie-coming-up.html

http://www.energybulletin.net/3800.html

http://www.energybulletin.net/3845.html

Try searching the phrase: I’m convinced we have the technology to handle it right now.

I don’t know what you see there, but the results I’ve got aren’t accurate. I only see three sites, none of which are the original source of the quote on mkinghubbert.com or the energybulletin.net page.

— End Correction —

So, alternative energy stories on Cryptogon, or not?

It’s up to you.

Related:

Dirt: The Silent Global Crisis

All Electric Vehicles and the Concept of Enough

Clean Energy and Turning What’s Left Into Trash

Posted in Energy | Top Of Page

Comments are closed.